Adam Savage Quotes

In the United States, whatever you may think of Julian Assange, even people who are not necessarily big fans of his are very concerned about the way in which the United States government and some companies have handled Wikileaks.

Any government that likes to call themselves democratic should welcome Snowden and allow him to live in their country.

I see Edward Snowden as someone who has chosen, at best, exile from the country he loves-with a serious risk of his assassination by agents of his government or life in prison (in solitary confinement)-to awaken us to the danger of our loss of democracy to a total-surveilla nce state

The [Edward] Snowden disclosures created this perception that people's privacy was being put at significant risk.

Disclosure of private e-mails from government officials has been a legal issue in many states.

The public must know about the general outlines of surveillance activities in order to evaluate whether the government is achieving the appropriate balance between privacy and security.

I worked with people like Edward Snowden. Well, not people who took stuff home.

Snowden's revelations shocked the world and made it very clear why we need to have some way to look over those who look over us. With increasing terrorist attacks, security is critical, but not without any accountability or oversight.

I mean, Ed Snowden was basically saying the same things that Bill Binney and Thomas Drake and other U.S. whistleblowers had said before him. But he came out more publicly, and maybe revealed more. He showed that when the U.S. government said, 'We are not surveilling U.S. citizens,' that was a lie.

It didn't really change my opinion about [Edward] Snowden all that much, but I definitely feel like as a culture, it gave us information that generated a responsibility to protect ourselves as much as we can and also a responsibility to hold our government accountable to honoring our constitutional rights.

They're mounting a campaign right now with the ACLU and a lot of different organizations advocating for [Edward Snoden] pardoning before [Barack] Obama leaves office. Wouldn't it be incredible to see something like that happen? I don't know what we can expect. I am interested in the different points and perspectives that people have.

What many commentators have missed in the ongoing attack on Edward Snowden is not that he uncovered information that made clear how corrupt and intrusive the American government has become - how willing it is to engage in vast crimes against the American public.

With some of the issues around the Snowden leaks and what the NSA was doing I think have scared people around the world and I think in many ways rightfully so.

I was very happy to learn Oliver Stone had decided to make a film about Edward Snowden and believe this is a powerful and inspiring film.

On the question of information security, he claims that, in a Trump Administration, the U.S. government will not spy on its own citizens. If true, this would represent a turn away from the strong language that he has used about identifying terrorists on our soil.

It's tempting to dismiss the debate about the National Security Agency spying on Americans as a technical conflict about procedural rights.

We should stop thinking of Snowden, to the extent that we ever were, as a hero. We should stop thinking of him as a whistleblower.

I mean, the FBI has to assure people who come and help them that they're going to be able to keep their identities confidential and protect them.

It would be a matter of concern for government if intrusive data capture has been deployed against Indian citizens or government infrastructure.

Our national security requires us to be strong and fearless, but not at the cost of personal privacy.

Saying that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about freedom of speech because you have nothing to say.

There is no world of absolute, complete privacy or a world of complete national security.

The stakes in the encryption debate are high, with significant consequences for personal privacy, the U.S. private sector, and our national security.

What would the infrastructure of the Internet look like if mass surveillance wasn't its business model?

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the ENCRYPT Act sends a clear message that the complicated issues with encryption must be addressed thoughtfully and nationally.